<p>User I agree, I don’t think it is the ECs, it’s just a convenient way to downgrade the high SAT and grades that Asians are earning because no one knows the ECs of any other ethnic group. It helps those who cannot or do not want to see the data to rationalize about how fair the admissions process is and that holistic is a good thing in that process. You read how many were upset of my hypothetical AdCom dialogue. People who blindly believe that admissions are doing good, will do anything to see the data in a way that conforms to this misplaced belief.</p>
<p>BTW mavant the link to graduation and attrition i posted doesn’t distinguish between those that barely passed and those who were at the top of their class. Not sure I want to go to a doctor that barely passed.</p>
<p>Hey Poetgrl, I have no problem with the country’s best cellist getting into Harvard (Yo!) but most people who get into Harvard have ordinary ECs. Do you think I don’t know Harvard grads? Lol. Most get in because they are academically sharp. It’s just that Asians have to be a little bit sharper likely because Asians are not allowed to compete with non-Asians.</p>
<p>Don’t believe me? Show me a really series of really exceptional EC from the Harvard acceptance threads. </p>
<p>Well see, that’s why data is such a wonderful thing. Surely you can show me the Gods of Olympus at Harvard, while I only know them as guys I drank with. :)</p>
<p>Look, Harvard is just another school, OK? Yeah, people here are smart. Very smart in fact. The employers in iBanking and consulting know that which is why they flock to recruit here. </p>
<p>But it is exceptionally rare to have a better musician at Harvard than at Julliard, a better squash player than one that turned pro (or plays for Trinity haha), or a better physicist than one that went to Caltech. Let’s not circulate the myth that you need Olympian ECs to get into Harvard.</p>
<p>Because you don’t. But I will change my mind if you show me counter examples.</p>
<p>User51969, I don’t know if I’d go that far. If you are an URM, the ECs could be quite ordinary overall…but clearly better than other URMs. If you’re Asian, you might need super-human ECs to outperform other Asians. Hence, this lawsuit about quotas. </p>
<p>That may be true mavant. I was talking of the average Harvard kid, including Whites. Frankly, no one here has cured cancer. </p>
<p>Edit: Or won the Fields Medal either. As my mom used to tell me, “After all that I have done for you, is one Fields Medal too much to ask for …” :))</p>
<p>I doubt the quota is going to go away though. The seats have to come from somewhere. If for example Harvard made all the apps race blind Asians would end up with some 40 pct of the seats. Either that comes out of the back of the White kids or the URMs. It won’t come out of the back of the Jewish kids, I don’t think, as there is a very strong Jewish political lobby in the USA. Similarly, there is a very strong political lobby for URMs. So it has to come out of the backs of White non-Jewish block. As it is, outside of the other quotas (legacy, athlete, development case) this group is underrepresented. It will become severely underrepresented if the Asian quota is eliminated, and I don’t think that will work politically.</p>
<p>So if I were a betting man I would say the Asian quota is here to stay. Though the USSC likely is very willing to be convinced otherwise … so who knows? It’s easier to count cards at the blackjack table so I will stick to that instead.</p>
<p>USer51696, I wonder how many Asian kids are recruited to Harvard for athletics. I personally have heard of 5. We all know Jeremy Lin playing in the NBA. But did you know about the Harvard ladies who played hockey for the US Olympic team? Forget just national level talent, in some cases, Asians need worldclass ECs. I wouldn’t call them ordinary…meaning State or National level talent may not be enough anymore…you literally have to be an Olympian.</p>
<p>Well see though, the Asians are bringing this on themselves. The quota is the quota. That’s not going to change. So if all Asians decided to relax today then the same number will still get in, and likely the same people will get in as well, but everyone could goof off far more.</p>
<p>The issue is not whether rowing crew is “worth more” than a 2300 SAT. The issue is whether rowing is “worth more” if it’s done by a white applicant vs. a done by an asian applicant.</p>
<p>Are different standards being applied for any admissions criteria on the basis of race?</p>
<p>Harvard also likes geographic diversity and this goes against Asians concentrated in NYC (especially certain high schools), LA, San Fran, etc. I don’t think the high state Asian from Montana needs to have an Olympic medal to stand out in the application process- being from Montana might be enough. Are there Chinese athletes at Harvard? Sure. Are they still top students? Yes. Would these athletes get into Stanford or Berkeley with just above average athletics but high stats? Probably not. The athletic standards are different at Stanford, and just being good at golf or tennis might not be enough as they have applicants who are great at the sport and have top stats.</p>
<p>Whatever it is, I can’t see anyone with a 2100 SAT having any trouble doing well at Harvard. And if they bring some talent or money or justify the existence of the Study of Greek Grammar dept or allow H to say they have kids from all 50 states and 100 countries, so be it.</p>
<p>700 per section is NOT, in any way, a low score, and I will maintain, a perfectly good (even high) cutoff for “good enough to look at everything else and see who meets our institutional needs this year”.</p>
<p>"The seats have to come from somewhere. If for example Harvard made all the apps race blind Asians would end up with some 40 pct of the seats. Either that comes out of the back of the White kids or the URMs. It won’t come out of the back of the Jewish kids, I don’t think, as there is a very strong Jewish political lobby in the USA. "</p>
<p>Did you honestly really mean to say this? How is there a “Jewish lobby” in the Harvard adcom table? Do you think there’s some guy who sits there with the rejected pile pulling out applicants with the names Goldberg, Cohen and Katz and throwing them onto the accepted pile? </p>
<p>I want to make exactly sure you have a chance to explain your thought process here. </p>
<p>OHMomof2 If you don’t believe that a 200+ point difference in SAT will result in students not doing well at Harvard, then how do you explain why those with the highest qualifications who start out as STEM majors at Harvard graduate with STEM degrees at over twice the rate as those with the lower qualifications? </p>
<p>Why do you think that these bright kids with 2000-2100 SAT scores fail to complete their chosen STEM major at such a high rate compared to those above 2300 SAT and switch out to get non-STEM degree which arguably are less desirable than STEM majors??</p>
<p>“But it is exceptionally rare to have… a better physicist [at Harvard] than one that went to Caltech.” On what are you basing this assertion? I don’t have a handy reference for physics but if you look at the Putnam teams (this is a college level math competition), you have to go back to the 1970’s before you find Caltech routinely outperforming Harvard. In the past few decades, Caltech outperformed Harvard only a few times. So, are you just making stuff up?</p>
<p>I always thought Harvard (and Yale, Princeton, and Stanford) were more about graduating leaders than geniuses. What is the test for that?</p>
<p>Seriously, back when we were kids and now you found/find the children of the connected at these schools: children of the very rich, of senators, presidents, and cabinet heads. </p>
<p>Lizardly If graduating leaders than geniuses is what HYPS is all about then what the heck is SAT and GPA so important to those institutions and why are those two factors sky high at those institutions?</p>
<p>racial quota is here to stay. What it took for the jewish quota to end was the holocaust. … I don’t see any event of that scale happening in the near future for Asians, so they’ll continue to face this discrimination. </p>
<p>If this case survives summary judgment, then the analysis used by Espenshade in the past is probably a good way to analysis Harvard’s admission data:</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>If the admissions data from Harvard contains more variables such as parent income or geographic location these can easily be added to the logistic regression model. If the plaintiffs can show a statistically significant difference for race from this analysis then they may receive a favorable verdict.</p>
The only event you need is for a republican successor to obama to appoint the replacement when presently 81 yr old Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg retires/passes away. Who knows, maybe the next president will hit the jackpot and replace presently 76 yr old Justice Steven Breyer, too.</p>